There are many questions pertaining to corporate identity that are either difficult or impossible to address sufficiently. Consequently, attempts to define the term often result in empty phrases. The most common formulation, however, is that corporate identity is the harmony of the internal and external image of a company.
Despite the fact that the nature and significance of corporate identity has been discussed at length over the past two decades, a definitive, universally accepted definition of the term is still wanting. This is because some consider the concept of corporate identity too young to be defined, while others have already declared it obsolete.
Notwithstanding the debate about the concept’s popular relevance, it can be argued that the real potential for corporate identity is only just beginning to be explored. This perspective is based on studying familiar and observable (>) trends in both the competitive corporate world and the everyday life of consumers, which have been irrevocably altered by changes in industrial culture,market (>) globalization and restructuring, and the increasing complexity of products. Froman industrial and economic perspective, these developments substantiate the belief that clearly, credibly, and convincingly communicated corporate identities will become increasingly significant in the years to come. Others argue, on the other hand, that the conceptual distinction between “corporate identity” and “brand identity” (> Brand) has become increasingly ambiguous, and that the latter term has in effect made the former obsolete.
Nonetheless, at least three aspects appear fundamental to defining the term “corporate identity.” First, corporate identity is the sum of all forms of corporate outward show. In other words: in addition to the visual image a company provides (corporate design), it also involves all the verbal expressions, behaviors, and structures that a company uses when interacting both within its own corporate structure and with the public. Second, corporate identity requires that all of the above forms of expression are adequately consistent. This consistency does not have to be absolute. Conflict and ambivalence is not necessarily at odds with an attractive and identifiable corporate identity. Third, a successful or competitive corporate identity must refer to an essential core in all its forms of expression. In other words, corporate identity has to revolve around a core set of (>) values.
It is helpful when facing these ambiguities to progress beyond questions like: “What is corporate identity?” “How relevant is corporate identity?” and “How does corporate identity differ from branding?” and instead examine the issue from a more procedural perspective. For example, the question of how a corporate identity is created helps us recognize it not as a defined result, but as a process of development. Likewise, investigating the various ways in which corporations form their identities illustrates that the process is both nonlinear and complex. Even the simple breakdown of one corporation’s day-to-day process of identity development reveals it as a creative task.
It is important to abandon any notion of a linearly developed corporate identity and instead conceptually envisage the process as a cyclical one. The origin and course of a corporate identity can almost never be located definitively in that it is too dependent on a variety of contextual and cultural factors. The process is highly politicized; that is, always contingent upon the results of conflicts, the powers of self-assertion, and on forming consensus and reaching compromise. The politics of corporate identity development are not particularly surprising because, of course, corporations are themselves political institutions that must contend with the realities of power struggles and conflicts of interests. The development of a corporate identity is a continual, cyclical, and often contested process. In other words, dead ends and detours are an inevitable part of a journey for which there is no specified destination.
The process of corporate identity development is ultimately about translating a company’s core values into concrete procedures that describe the desired interaction between the company and the consumer or general public. These procedures are ultimately intended to form a consistent chain of experience for the consumer. Once its core values have been established, the three main steps to creating and sustaining a successful corporate identity can be broadly described as follows: & Creative and strategic conveyance of core values through all text-based and visual materials and interactions. & Deeper establishment of corporate identity in consumer consciousness through professional and consistent management. & Regular evaluations and assessments to ensure consistency and identify weaknesses.
In successful cases, this cycle of identity development can eventually come to achieve a certain synergistic energy (> Synergy). Individual elements between separate fields intersect, individual activities optimize each other, the process accelerates, and the company’s internal and external operations come into greater alignment. Initiating and maintaining an ambitious and complex identity program of this sort requires vision, courage, power, perseverance, as well as charisma, confidence and, above all, (>) creativity.
Creative thinking and action therefore are required of all aspects of corporate identity development, not just those that specifically involve the activity of design. Creative solutions are always needed to find innovative outcomes, facilitate communication across multiple networks, develop flexible product systems, and invent new processes. Overseeing vested rights and reevaluating proven solutions and strategies in critical situations are not necessarily sufficient ways of developing a comprehensive program of corporate identity. The synergistic relationships mentioned above must be constantly reevaluated, as otherwise it could turn into a vicious cycle.
Using the term “creativity” within this context also helps clarify what is not meant here, that is, the creativity of an independent artist or an autonomous genius (> Auteur Design). Creativity in developing identity programs for companies means constantly searching for originality and (>) innovation for all communicative problems. Yet, while developing specific corporate identities, creativity also has to display a reasonable and recognizable relationship to the given situation—that is, it must serve and adapt to the relevant cycle.
Evenifwhat follows seemsinitially like a contradictory list, creative identity development must, above all, be focused. The broadest possible variety of creative ideas is not what is needed. It is important to reduce the universe of creative possibilities down to only those ideas, activities, and things that most convincingly relate to the defined features of the corporate personality in question. In other words, it is necessary to creatively narrow this search in such a way that the results are not banal, but rather, distinctive and convincing. Secondly, the designs have to be made stylistically consistent. To maintain this consistency, it is important to narrow the variety of possible responses, and focus on a consistent (>) integration of all the corporate identity’s forms of expression, so that each contains a recall factor while avoiding monotonous homogeneity. Thirdly, the designs should be striking and memorable. This is not to say that solutions that are consistently new and unique are always best; it is necessary to remain faithful to the corporate personality’s core message, while exploring the possibility for fresh interpretations. The result should be a constant reiteration of its central message in a way that does not become tedious, but always stimulates attention.
> Branding, Continuity
